Intel Core i3-7300T vs Intel Core i5-2400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data in this comparison is remarkably one-sided. Across every recorded benchmark, the Intel Core i3-7300T finishes ahead of the Intel Core i5-2400. The database shows five head-to-head tests, and the i3-7300T wins all five.

The largest margin appears in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the i3-7300T scores 354 against 329 for the i5-2400, a 7.6% advantage. That pattern repeats across the newer Cinebench versions. In R20 multicore, the i3-7300T posts 1477 versus 1374, a 7.5% lead. In R23 multicore, the gap is 3519 to 3272, again a 7.5% difference. The consistency of these multicore deltas suggests the i3-7300T’s architectural efficiency offsets its two-core deficit.

Single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-7300T scores 208 against 194, a 7.2% win. In R23 single-core, it reaches 496 versus 462, a 7.4% margin. These single-threaded wins are notable because the i5-2400 has a higher boost clock of 3.40 GHz compared to the i3-7300T’s fixed 3.50 GHz base clock. The newer Kaby Lake core clearly extracts more work per clock cycle.

What is striking is that the i5-2400 offers two additional physical cores, yet still loses every multicore test. The recorded data indicates that thread scheduling and per-core throughput matter more than raw core count in these workloads. The i3-7300T’s four threads, while fewer than the i5-2400’s four physical cores, appear to be more efficient under Cinebench’s rendering tasks.

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce this. The i3-7300T holds an average score of 1211, placing it at the 34th percentile of all CPUs. The i5-2400 averages 1187, sitting at the 33rd percentile. That is a narrow overall gap, but the head-to-head deltas are consistent at roughly 7.2% to 7.6% across every test. The i5-2400’s additional Geekbench entries in its own benchmark list (scoring 2011 multicore and 666 single-core) are not part of the head-to-head set, so they do not factor into this direct comparison.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded measurements, the Intel Core i3-7300T is the faster processor in every benchmark where both were tested. If the task is Cinebench rendering, either multicore or single-core, the i3-7300T delivers a consistent 7% to 8% improvement over the i5-2400. There is no workload in this dataset where the i5-2400 pulls ahead.

The i5-2400’s only structural advantages are its four physical cores and larger 6 MB shared L3 cache. However, the benchmark data shows that those features do not translate into a performance win in the tested applications. The i3-7300T’s two cores with four threads, backed by a newer 14 nm Kaby Lake design, outpace the older 32 nm Sandy Bridge architecture in every recorded run.

For a user choosing between these two desktop chips, the data clearly favors the i3-7300T. It wins all five head-to-head tests, posts a higher average benchmark score (1211 versus 1187), and operates at a much lower thermal envelope of 35 W versus 95 W. The i5-2400, marked as end-of-life in the database, offers no performance advantage in any measured category. The only scenario where the i5-2400 might be preferable is if the user specifically needs its four physical cores for non-Cinebench workloads, but the recorded data provides no evidence of such a benefit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras of Intel’s desktop lineup. The i3-7300T is built on Kaby Lake, a 14 nm process node. The i5-2400 uses Sandy Bridge, fabricated on a 32 nm process. This process gap explains much of the performance difference, as the newer node allows for higher clock speeds at lower power and better per-core efficiency.

The transistor counts and die sizes reflect this generational divide. The i5-2400 contains 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The i3-7300T’s datasheet does not list transistor count or die size in the database, but the 14 nm node implies a denser, more modern design. The i5-2400’s larger die and older process contribute to its 95 W TDP, while the i3-7300T manages just 35 W.

Cache layouts differ as well. Both processors share 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core. The L3 cache, however, favors the i5-2400: it has 6 MB shared, while the i3-7300T has only 4 MB shared. Despite this 2 MB deficit, the i3-7300T still wins every benchmark, indicating that its architectural improvements in execution and memory latency overcome the smaller cache.

The integrated graphics also differ. The i3-7300T pairs with Intel HD 630, while the i5-2400 uses Intel HD 2000. The database does not include iGPU benchmarks, but the newer HD 630 is from a more recent graphics architecture. Memory support diverges as well: the i3-7300T uses DDR4 with a stated bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, whereas the i5-2400 uses DDR3 with no bandwidth figure recorded. Both run dual-channel memory buses.

Socket compatibility is another divide. The i3-7300T fits Intel Socket 1151, while the i5-2400 uses Intel Socket 1155. These sockets are not interchangeable, so a motherboard upgrade is required to move from one to the other. Both CPUs offer PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, and neither supports ECC memory. Both have locked multipliers, meaning no overclocking through the multiplier.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Cores: i3-7300T has 2 cores; i5-2400 has 4 cores.
• Threads: i3-7300T has 4 threads; i5-2400 has 4 threads (no hyperthreading).
• Base clock: i3-7300T runs at 3.50 GHz; i5-2400 at 3.10 GHz.
• Boost clock: i3-7300T has no boost clock listed (fixed at 3.50 GHz); i5-2400 boosts to 3.40 GHz.
• TDP: i3-7300T draws 35 W; i5-2400 draws 95 W.
• Socket: i3-7300T uses Intel Socket 1151; i5-2400 uses Intel Socket 1155.
• Architecture: i3-7300T is Kaby Lake; i5-2400 is Sandy Bridge.
• Process node: i3-7300T is 14 nm; i5-2400 is 32 nm.
• Transistors: i3-7300T not listed; i5-2400 has 1,160 million.
• Die size: i3-7300T not listed; i5-2400 is 216 mm².
• L3 cache: i3-7300T has 4 MB shared; i5-2400 has 6 MB shared.
• Memory support: i3-7300T uses DDR4; i5-2400 uses DDR3.
• Memory bandwidth: i3-7300T is 38.4 GB/s; i5-2400 is not listed.
• Integrated graphics: i3-7300T has Intel HD 630; i5-2400 has Intel HD 2000.
• Production status: i3-7300T is active; i5-2400 is end-of-life.
• Release date: i3-7300T released 2017-01-02; i5-2400 released 2011-01-08.
• Part number: i3-7300T is SR35M; i5-2400 is SR00Q.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i3-7300T scores 3519, while the Intel Core i5-2400 scores 3272. The i3-7300T is 7.5% ahead.

Q: Does the i5-2400’s four cores give it a multicore advantage?

A: No. Despite having 4 physical cores versus the i3-7300T’s 2 cores (4 threads), the i5-2400 loses every multicore benchmark in the head-to-head data, with deltas ranging from 7.5% to 7.6% in favor of the i3-7300T.

Q: What is the single-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-7300T scores 208 versus 194 for the i5-2400, a 7.2% lead. In R23 single-core, the i3-7300T scores 496 versus 462, a 7.4% lead.

Q: Which processor has a smaller thermal footprint?

A: The i3-7300T has a TDP of 35 W, compared to 95 W for the i5-2400. That is a 60 W difference in the recorded specifications.

Q: Can these CPUs be used on the same motherboard?

A: No. The i3-7300T uses Intel Socket 1151, while the i5-2400 uses Intel Socket 1155. They are incompatible with each other’s sockets.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The i3-7300T has an average benchmark score of 1211, placing it at the 34th percentile of all CPUs. The i5-2400 averages 1187, at the 33rd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-7300T wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. That includes all five Cinebench tests: R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, R23 multicore, and R23 single-core. Its margins are tight but consistent, hovering between 7.2% and 7.6%. For rendering workloads, video encoding, or any application that scales with Cinebench-style threaded performance, the i3-7300T is the clear choice.

The i5-2400 does not win any of the five head-to-head tests. Its only potential advantage lies outside the benchmark data: it has four physical cores, which may benefit legacy software that expects true core count rather than logical threads. Its larger 6 MB L3 cache could also help in cache-sensitive workloads, though the recorded Cinebench results show no such benefit. The i5-2400’s higher boost clock of 3.40 GHz is also moot, since the i3-7300T’s fixed 3.50 GHz clock is already higher.

For users with an existing Socket 1155 motherboard, the i5-2400 might be a drop-in upgrade path, but that is a platform consideration, not a performance one. From a pure benchmark standpoint, the i3-7300T dominates. Its lower TDP (35 W versus 95 W) makes it far more suitable for small-form-factor or passively cooled systems. The i3-7300T also supports DDR4 memory, which is more modern and offers higher bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus no recorded figure for DDR3), though the i5-2400’s dual-channel DDR3 may still be adequate for older builds.

In summary, the data leaves no ambiguity: the i3-7300T is faster in every measured test, more efficient in power, and built on a newer architecture. The i5-2400’s only claims to relevance are its four physical cores and larger cache, neither of which produced a win in the recorded benchmarks.